Re: [tied] *-om ?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:59:44 +0100, Piotr Gasiorowski
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
>
> >25-03-2004 14:46, tgpedersen wrote:
> >
> >> BTW is there a connection between gen.pl. *-om and the

collective

> >> suffix of *(d)km-t-om ?
> >
> >Yes, if it meant '(ten) of tens'.
> >
>
> And no, if it meant "ten-thing" (thematic n. sg.).
>

Piotr: gen.pl. > *-om of *(d)km-t-om: yes possibly

Miguel: gen.pl. /= *-om of *(d)km-t-om, so no

My idea was: gen.pl. < *-om of *(d)km-t-om.

In other words: *-om was at first a collective-forming suffix, then
at some time it was included into the nominal paradigm (before there
was a plural category).

Torsten